Pros Stumped By 3 In. Fish-Gator

[fishgator]

If you were to follow the complete thread you would see we have established that the rectangular structures are opposite that of rugose coral. I have eliminated this possibility unless it is possible to have a fossil of a fossil. Calamites seems a longshot as well. The rock is quite crystaline, however the crystals seem 20x more prevalent on the impression itself. Though they don't show very well in the photographs I could swear I am distinctly seeing an intact left clavicle and a broken right one just below where it should be. Please excuse the terrible outlines in the photo.

[Jesse]

It is extremely possible to have a mold of an impression of a fossil. I do not think there is anyway this is any form of vertebrate fossil, it is some trick of the taphonomic process that turned a rugose coral into what is presented here. For this to be a fossilized fish it would have to be a negative impression left by the skin and scales and I can't think of any fish that had projected rectangular scales. Also fish do not have clavicles as they relate to humans, they have pectoral girdles that are very different from mammals. Sometimes it's difficult to look past what we want a fossil to be and accept it for what it is, it is a neat fossil regardless

[Auspex]

I think you may be projecting images into vague forms...

There is nothing about this object that makes me think it is/was even an animal, much less a vertebrate.

[Fossildude19]

A new lead in the case ?? Click HERE.

It appears Ruthjohn's fossil was found in\near marine deposits.

Leaning toward coral now....

Regards,

[Jesse]

I showed this to my adviser and boss this morning, a well published invertebrate paleontologist, and he said it was a badly eroded rogose coral.

[BobWill]

If you were to follow the complete thread you would see we have established that the rectangular structures are opposite that of rugose coral. I have eliminated this possibility unless it is possible to have a fossil of a fossil. Calamites seems a longshot as well. The rock is quite crystaline, however the crystals seem 20x more prevalent on the impression itself. Though they don't show very well in the photographs I could swear I am distinctly seeing an intact left clavicle and a broken right one just below where it should be. Please excuse the terrible outlines in the photo.

Here is a picture of a partially worn coral showing some rectangular structures similar to yours. If you can find a picture of the skin or other surface of a vertebrate that looks more like your fossil than this coral then you might see opinions change.

I expect everyone on this forum has at some time had to say "oops, never mind" myself in particular, so please don't feel bad about negative feedback and don't let this experience discourage you from posting other fossils or pursuing fossil collecting.

Cheers

Bob

Edited March 21, 2012 by BobWill

[Xiphactinus]

I'd be willing to bet $$$ that's a coral.

[Herb]

Still go with coral, here's some pix of weathered Mississippian rugose corals.

[squalicorax]

This is with out a doubt an internal mold that is weathered of a Rugose/Horn Coral or a Bryozoan. I see various forms of these in Silurian Dolostone here in Wisconsin. The original poster doesn't seem to want our help anymore.

Edited March 23, 2012 by squalicorax

[Herb]

I agree.

[Scylla]

Great thread! So it seems that the consensus is drifting towards weathered rugose coral, with plant parts a second place and bryzoan getting honorable mention. I would like to complement the professional for his 100% accuracy ( " Here’s a suggestion: post this to the Fossil ID Forum at thefossilforum.com. There are many very capable eyes over there and there’s a pretty good chance that someone there will be able to ID it.") Now I may be a professional, but clearly not a paleontology one. but how about a sponge or glass sponge to help confuse the issue further? Just wondering if they could be a possibility? I did notice that the picture in post

#45 has some voids that look like shell molds. If so then this looks more marine in nature.

[Hannah]

Looks a lot like a Lycopod to me. This pic is an example of one from Mazon Creek:

Edited March 24, 2012 by Hannah

[flyguy784]

Although there are some geometric similarities, I'm sure it's not a Lycopod. I'm still going with Rugose coral.

[BobWill]

Yep these are diamond shaped. Still looking for a picture of anything else with the rectangular shape of a coral.

[Herb]

Just a thought, how about a coral?

[Fossils4U]

I agree with JohnJ.. Need more pics.. Looks like a sea slug with spikes!